On page 8, Harrell describes what a proof-text is.

A proof-text is a scriptural passage lifted out of its original context and given an interpretation other than that which was originally intended–or at least as can be determined by the most reasonable reading of the text.  BYU religion professor Stephen Robinson notes that even Latter-day Saints have a tendency to read Mormon beliefs into the Bible as proof-texts, largely because they assume that the doctrines of the Restoration are all corroborated in the Bible.⁴⁰ Most occurences of proof-texting are the innocent result of careless or uninformed reading of the scriptures, though they can still be detrimental.  When however, one deliberately twists the meaning of a passage in order to justify a personal belief or bias, it is condemned in both the New Testament and the Book of Mormon as “wresting [i.e. twisting] the scriptures” (2 Pet. 3:16; Alma 13:20, 41:1).⁴¹

Harrell describes a proof-text well known to missionaries.  Often Christians will refer to Revelation 22:18, and state that the Bible is the end of God’s word, so there is no need for a Book of Mormon.  Missionaries will often counter that a similar scripture is found in Deuteronomy 4:2, and would have left the Bible far smaller if Deuteronomy was the end of scripture.

But Christians are guilty of proof-texting as well.  Zechariah 13:6 reads (quoting from page 9, formatting changed):

And one shall say unto him, What are these wounds in thine hands?  Then he shall answer, Those with which I was wounded in the house of my friends.

Latter-day Saints, like many other Christians, interpret this passage as a prophecy of Christ.⁴⁴ The Doctrine and Covenants (D&C 45:51-52) alludes to Zechariah 13:6 this way and even adds wound to the “feet”, which makes the fit more obvious.

According to most biblical scholars, the wounds referred to in Zechariah are actually in the chest (the Hebrew reads “between” the hands) and, in the context of Zecharaiah 13:2-6, were inflicted on “the [false] prophets” in Israel (v. 4).⁴⁵ The NSRV uses the pronouns “they” and “them” thoughout verses 2-6, making it clear that verse 6 is speaking of the same false prophets alluded to in verse 4.  Pagan prophets were often self-lacerated (Lev. 19:28; Deut. 14:1; 1 Kgs. 18:28) for reasons that are not entirely clear.  Methodist Bible commentator Adam Clarke censured popular Christian applications of this verse to Christ noting that it was clearly referring to false prophets who alleged that they have received these marks in their own families when, more likely, the wounds “had been dedicated to … idols.”⁴⁶

Harrell notes that New Testament writers often looked for parallels in Christ’s life, and then found them in the Old Testament.  Some examples found on page 10: (formatting changed)

• Hosea 11:1:  ”When Israel was a child, then I loved him, and called my son out of Egypt”; he then applies it as a prophecy of Christ’s infancy in Egypt (Matt 2:15), even though in its original context it had reference to the historical exodus of Israel from Egypt.⁴⁹
• Matthew also cites Jeremiah 31:15 (“A voice was heard in Ramah, lamentation, and bitter weeping; Rachel weeping for her children refused to be comforted for her children, because they were not”) as a reference to Herod’s slaughter of Bethlehem’s male children, while the original context referred to the slaughtering of Jerusalem’s inhabitants and the Babylonian exile of the children of Israel (Jer. 31:16).

There is no harm in finding shadows and types of Christ in these passages, but one should not confuse later allegorical meanings with the originally intended meaning.

Harrell describes other proof-texts in the New Testament.  He also notes that there is a common misperception about Old Testament prophets.  While many of us like to think that ancient prophets saw our day clearly, Harrell says that ‘Old Testaments prophets were more forthtellers than foretellers, with their attention being focused on immediate times and situations” rather than being prophecies of the distant future.’

A recent comment on Stephen Marsh’s Sunday School post decried the use of “proof texting of modern LDS concepts from the ancient texts”.  However, it seems that the LDS, like ancient and modern Jews and Christians, are all guilty of proof-texting.

In order to avoid proof-texting, one must really understand the ancient cultures of the Bible.  Is it realistic to believe that church members without a degree in theology can really avoid proof-texting?  Is it acceptable to look for parallels between Christ and the Old Testament? Are these proof-texts valuable in finding new meanings from old scriptures?

We often think that the Bible has a set number of books.  However, this is not true.  The King James Version (that many Protestants and Mormons use) has 39 Old Testament Books, but the Catholic Bible has 46 books, and the Eastern Orthodox Bible has 51 books.  The extra 7 books in the Catholic Bible are:  Tobit, Judith, 1 Maccabees, 2 Maccabees, Sirach, Baruch, and Wisdom.  In addition to these books, the Orthodox Bible also contains 3 Maccabees, 4 Maccabees, 1 Esdras, Odes, and Letter of Jeremiah.  A few other books are considered part of the Apocrypha:  Bel and the Dragon, Song of the Three Young Men and Prayer of Azariah, Prayer of Manasseh, Story of Susannah.  The Book of Esther has 6 additional chapters in Greek, not found in the KJV.

Recently, I purchased the New American Bible.  It is the standard Bible for American Catholics.  One of the things that I was surprised to see in the NAB was scholarly information integrated within the Bible.  For example, there is a brief introduction to the Documentary Hypothesis right before the Book of Genesis.  The Dead Sea Scrolls are the oldest available versions of many Biblical books (in some cases by 1000 years), and this version of the Bible includes corrections from the Dead Sea Scrolls.  I found that pretty cool.

As part of my introduction to “the Apocrypha”, I thought it would be interesting to discuss the book of Judith.  (Here is a post on some other apocryphal books I have discussed previously.)  As I was looking through the table of contents, I was immediately struck by the female name of Judith.  After all, except for Ruth and Esther, I can’t think of any books of scripture with a female name.  So, I decided to pick this one first.

Judith was the widow of a man named Manasseh.  The Assyrians were attacking Israel, and cut off the water supply.  Concerned for her people, Judith dressed up in “her festive garments and all her feminine adornments” (Judith 12:15) , and approached the Assyrians.  She gains the trust of Assyrian General Holofernes, and promises to deliver Israel to them with no loss of life for the Assyrians.  At this point, the story gets really interesting, starting in chapter 13.

2  Judith was left alone in the tent with Holofernes, who lay prostrate on his bed, for he was sodden with wine.  3 She had ordered her maid to stand outside the bedroom and wait, as on the other days, for her to come out; she said she would be going out for her prayer.  To Bagoas she had said this also.

4  When all had departed, and no one, small or great, was left in the bedroom, Judith stood by Holofernes’ bed and said within herself: “O Lord, God of all might, in this hour look graciously on my undertaking for the exaltation of Jerusalem: 5 now is the time for aiding your heritage and for carrying out my design to shatter the enemies who have risen against us.”  6 She went to the bedpost near the head of Holofernes, and taking his sword from it, 7 drew close to the bed, grasped the hair of his head, and said, “Strengthen me this day, O God of Israel!”

8 Then with all her might she struck him twice in the neck and cut off his head.  9 She rolled his body off the bed and took the canopy from its supports.  Soon afterward, she came out and handed over the head of Holofernes to her maid, 10 who put it into her food pouch; and the two went off together as they were accustomed to do for prayer.”

Judith and her maid return to Israel and show them the head of Holofernes.  Encouraged, the Israelites then rout the scared Assyrians.

So why is this story considered apocryphal?  The NAB Bible cautions, “Any attempt to read the book directly against the backdrop of Jewish history in relation to the empires of the ancient world is bound to fail.”  The Jewish Encyclopedia says,

with the very first words of the tale, “In the twelfth year of the reign of Nebuchadnezzar, who reigned over the Assyrians in Nineveh,” the narrator gives his hearers a solemn wink. They are to understand that this is fiction, not history. It did not take place in this or that definite period of Jewish history, but simply “once upon a time,” the real vagueness of the date being transparently disguised in the manner which has become familiar in the folk-tales of other parts of the world.

Many believe this book to be historical fiction.  Martin Luther noted that books of questionable authenticity are found only in Greek, not Hebrew.  Jews also do not consider the book canonical.  Catholics consider the book written “by godly men”, but not quite on par with other scriptures.  However, they do consider the book canonical.  What do you think of this story?  Is it nice to have a feminine hero?

I don’t believe that LDS scripture allows for a restriction against blacks’ holding the priesthood.  Nor do I think that LDS theology can reasonably maintain that today’s blacks are descendants of Cain or that ancient intermarriage with Canaanites perpetuated any racial curse.  Too many scriptures collide with those ideas for them to be valid.

I found this perspective intriguing and  had to learn more.

LDS people have often believed that marriage to Canaanites (who were believed to be black) excluded one from the priesthood.  Yet Allred notes that intermarriage between blacks and white occurred routinely over centuries.  He notes intermarriage occurred in diverse cultures including Egypt, Portugal and the Greco-Roman world.  He notes a problem with LDS interpretations of scriptures.  From page 40,

Secondly, even though the terms Canaanite and Negro have been used interchangeably in the LDS Church, Canaanites weren’t black and they certainly weren’t African.  Biblically, Canaanites descended from Canaan, the fourth son of Ham.  African blacks are generally believed to be descendants of Cush, the first son of Ham.  This is important because the Canaanites were those who have been referred to as the “cursed” lineage while practically nothing is said about Ham’s other children.  It was Canaan who was cursed by Noah–not specifically Ham and not Ham’s other children.  According to Genesis, Noah cursed Canaan after Ham saw his father naked and drunk and ridiculed his father to his other brothers (Gen. 9:21-25).  Before this time, Ham had been righteous: “And Noah and his sons hearkened unto the Lord, and gave heed and they were called the sons of God.”  (Moses 8:13).  This scripture appears in the Pearl of Great Price, which also contains this statement:  ”And thus Noah found grace in the eyes of the Lord; for Noah was a just man, and perfect in his generation; and he walked with God, as did also his three sons, Shem, Ham, and Japheth (Moses 8:27; italics mine).

These verses are particularly important because Mormon folklore contains the common belief that Ham wrongly married a descendant of Cain, bringing a curse upon himself and his descendants.  If such a commandment forbidding marriage into Cain’s lineage existed, how could Ham have contracted such a marriage and still have been considered righteous enough to get passage on the ark?   The answer has always been that Cain’s genes needed to be preserved; but this argument does not address the fact that Ham was righteous and “walked with God” after his marriage–a circumstance that, according to tradition, was impossible.

Although Canaan was not born until after the flood, there is a land of Canaan referred to in Moses 7:7 before the flood.  There is also a land of Cainan.  It is likely that both are variant spellings of the same word and refer to the same land.  This is because the Book of Moses was dictated by Joseph Smith and the two terms are homophones.  The decision to spell the antediluvian land “Canain” was entirely editorial.  Enoch came from the land of Cainan and called it “a land of righteousness unto this day” (Moses 6:42).  In Moses 7:4-8, Enoch sees a vision of the world “for the space of many generations.”  He describes how the people of Canaan (Cainan?) destroy the people of Shum.  After this, we are told the land is cursed with heat and that a blackness comes upon all the children of Canaan–it was not inherited from Cain.¹⁵

Allred continues further with this reasoning, and notes that on page 42,

Why curse Canaan for his father’s actions?….LDS theology affirms that children who repent are not punished for their ancestor’s faults.

He then quotes the 2nd article of faith, and notes some contradictions.  There are some spurious sources that claimed that Joseph Smith said that Cain could not hold the priesthood because he killed Abel.  However, if murder is the disqualifier, then all murderers should be disqualified.

If priesthood was withheld from Africans because their ancestor [Cain] was a murderer, why were King David’s descendants allowed the priesthood, for he too was a murderer?  Why are not white sons of murderers kept from the priesthood?

The Book of Abraham states that a descendant of Canaan discovered the land of Egypt and that all the Egyptians are descended from Canaan:

Now this king of Egypt was a descendant from the loins of Ham, and was a partaker of the blood of Canaanites by birth.

From this descent sprang all the Egyptians, and thus the blood of the Canaanites was preserved in the land.  (Abraham 1:21-22)

The problem that is immediately apparent is the fact that Abraham and Joseph each married an Egyptian woman.  One response offered to counter that damaging evidence has been that the Egyptians at the time of these marriages were Semitic Hyksos who had conquered Egypt and so were not really Canaanites.  This explanation contradicts Abraham 1:21-22.  It also contradicts history.  The Hyksos held power in Egypt for a maximum of only one hundred fifty years.  If they were Egyptians during Abraham’s lifetime, it is not possible for them to still have been in power in Joseph’s day.¹⁸

On page 43, Allred notes that Hugh Nibley said that Asenath

“was the daughter of the high priest of Heliopolis and hence of the pure line of Ham; she was also the wife of Joseph and the mother of our own vaunted ancestor Ephraim.”²⁰ Ephraim, son of a Canaanite mother, acquired the birthright by blessing from his grandfather Jacob.  According to LDS theology, the impact of this blessing cannot be underestimated.  The birthright was the right to preside in the priesthood, as will be explained later.

Allred continues to note other discrepancies about Canaanites in the Bible, and notes that Canaanites sometimes married Israelites–the Canaanite harlot Rahab was saved in Jericho, and is an ancestor of Jesus.  (Matt 1:5)  Allred notes that Edomites (Canaanites) were allowed in the the congregation of Israel (Deut. 23:7-8)  Moses also married an Ethiopian woman.  From the Bible, Allred concludes on page 45,

Little doubt remains that intermarriage between Canaanites and Israelites destroyed any chance for a pure, non-Canaanite race among the chosen seed.  One third of the house of Judah is Canaanite with an unknown portion among the other tribes.  What then can we make of the curse pronounced by Noah and of Abraham’s comments about Pharaoh’s lineage could not have the ‘right of the priesthood’? (Abr. 1:27).  It may be that Mormons have simply misunderstood those passages of scripture.

Regarding Abraham 1:27, Allred says it was Abraham that had the right to preside over the priesthood, rather than Pharaoh.  He notes that Joseph and his son Ephraim had the right to preside even though they weren’t of the Tribe of Levi.  From page 45,

even though the priesthood did not remain exclusively with Ephraim, the right to preside did.  Moses presided over Israel even though he was of the tribe of Levi.  Joseph Smith, however, claimed to be the “lawful heir” because he was of the tribe of Ephraim (D&C 86:8-11).  Since this authority was passed from father to only one son, when Noah gave it to Shem, Ham could not be the heir.  Ham and Japheth, together with their descendants, did not have the right to administer the priesthood because it was given to Shem.  Esau lost the right to Jacob.  Reuben lost the right to Joseph.  Manasseh lost that right when Jacob conferred it to Ephraim.  Each man who lost the birthright did not lose the right to be ordained to the priesthood; [page 46] rather, he lost the right to preside as the presiding high priest in a patriarchal order.  The scripture does not saw that Pharaoh could not hold the priesthood; it says that he could not have the “right to the priesthood” (Abr. 1:27)  This right had been given to Shem, who in turn gave it to his successor in the patriarchal office.

Years after the right of the priesthood had been passed to Abraham, the Pharaohs were feigning claim to it from Noah.  They did not merely claim priesthood; they claimed the right to preside over the priesthood.  Pharaoh, the son of Egyptus, established a patriarchal government in Egpyt; but he was of the lineage by which he could not have the “right of the priesthood” or “the right of the firstborn,” whic belonged to Shem and his posterity.  In response to Pharaoh’s claims, Abraham states, “But the records of the fathers, even the patriarchs, concerning the right of the priesthood, the Lord my God preserved in mine own hands: (Abr. 1:31; italics mine).  In other words, Abraham retained the right to preside over the priesthood.

So what do you think of Allred’s arguments?  Is there any scriptural basis in support of the priesthood ban?

On page 4, the two authors note that the church has “obscured and/or misrepresented in official church publications.”  For example, shortly after the revelation was announced in 1978, the June 17 issue of the Church News did not acknowledge that

Joseph Smith had allowed for the ordination of blacks as founder and leader of the LDS Church; and second, that Brigham Young, not Joseph Smith, initiated a practice of denying blacks the priesthood.

The church is finally starting to acknowledge some of these facts.  On page 29, Bringhurst noted that Apostle M Russell Ballard attended the dedication of a monument to Elijah Abel on Sept 28, 2002.  Ballard remarked that Abel was

“one of the few black members to receive the priesthood in the early Church.”  In stating that “black members were not allowed to hold the priesthood from 1852 to 1978,” Ballard conceded, “We don’t know all the reasons why the Lord does what he does….It’s difficult to know why all things happen.”⁷¹

In Chapter 1 of the book, Bringhurst explains the changing scholarship between 1945 to present concerning the priesthood ban.  Fawn Brodie in her 1945 book No Man Knows My History put forth the “Missouri Thesis” as an explanation for the priesthood ban.  In a nutshell, she said that conflicts between slave-supporting Missourians and anti-slavery Mormons erupted into problems.  The Mormons, in order to accommodate Missouri sensibilities, acquiesced on the issue and became more pro-slave.  Brodie noted that the Book of Abraham upheld that descendants of Ham should be servants of all, and that blacks should be denied the priesthood.

At first, other scholars supported the Missouri Thesis.  In the 1950s and 1960s, several authors supported the Missouri Thesis, with Stephen Taggart’s 1970 article being the most influential (called Mormonism’s Negro Policy: Social and Historical Origins.)  He noted WW Phelps 1833 article called “Free People of Color” caused non-Mormons to accuse Latter-day Saints  of “tampering with our slaves” which could “instigate them to bloodshed.”  In an “Extra”, Phelps responded that the article was “misunderstood”, but non-Mormons soon destroyed the Mormon printing press.  Taggart called this incident “the first hint of the emergence of the practice of excluding Negroes from the priesthood.”  Taggart said that the Extra “illustrates the process by which social stress was the instrumental factor in causing the Missouri Mormons to abandon their northern attitudes in favor of an anti-negro posture.”⁹ Taggart did note that some blacks tried to be baptized in 1835 or 1836 but there was a lack of “general consensus or Church-wide policy covering the subject [or black priesthood ordination] as late as 1838″, but there was no theological justification for denying the priesthood to blacks at this early period.  Bringhurst notes on page 17 that

“With the publication of the Book of Abraham [in 1842] all elements for the Church’s policy of denying the priesthood were present,” Taggart wrote, although he conceded that the “ordination of Negroes continued within the Church as late as 1841.”²⁰

In 1970, Lester Bush disputed some of Taggart’s claims.  Also from page 17,

Bush concedes that Taggart’s study “appear[s] more comprehensive than previous treatments, and…cites some uncommon, though seemingly very relevant references.”  Thus it gave the “impression that a very good case is being made.”  But despite its “generally accurate and well-documented rehearsal of the Jackson County period,” Bush found that it was marred “by an increasing incidence of speculative statements and secondary sources, and a sprinkling of factual errors….Most disturbingly…a number of relevant points [were] omitted from” Taggart’s treatments of “Mormon history and doctrine and the general setting in which they arose.”²³

Bush challenged Taggart’s undocumented assertion “that the early Mormons, were, in fact, abolitionists.”  Bush also questioned Taggart’s effort to place the origins of the Mormon black priesthood denial in the 1830s and found unconvincing the 1879 testimonies of Coltrin and Smoot.

…

[page 18] Bush questioned Taggart’s assertion that Joseph Smith intended the Book of Abraham as a “theological justification” for black priesthood denial.  Bush pointed to Taggart’s own admission that the Book of Abraham was “vague and cannot by itself be said to justify denying the priesthood to Negroes.”  Bush also noted the “lack of evidence that Joseph Smith ever used the book of Abraham to justify priesthood denial (nor apparently did any other Church leader, until the Utah period.)”²⁵ In fact, according to Bush,the earliest or “first known documentation of the policy of priesthood denial” came in 1849, five years after Joseph Smith’s death.  “There remains no period source to support the contention that Joseph Smith was the author of [Mormon black priesthood denial].”  Bush conceded that “Joseph Smith did express the then-prevalent opinion that Negroes were descendants of Canaan and Cain; yet he did not relate this to the priesthood in any account now available.”²⁶

So, we have a difference of opinion as to whether the Missouri Thesis was a correct interpretation for the implementation of the Priesthood ban.  Since the 1970′s most scholars have questioned the Missouri Thesis, including Ronald K Esplin, Michael Quinn, and Armaund Mauss to name a few.  Bringhurst sums up the scholarship to present on page 28,

In conclusion, what is the significance of all of these varied scholarly examinations?  It is evident that both Fawn M. Brodie and Stephen L. Taggart overstated their cases relative to the Mormon Missouri experience.    What about the contradictory, sometimes conflicting findings of John L. Brooker, D. Michael Quinn, Armaund L. Mauss, Robert Ben Madison, Rex E. Cooper, Klaus Hansen, and Lester Bush?  What do they tell us about the LDS presence in Missouri relative to evolving Mormon attitudes on race and the place of blacks?

In a sense, one is left with more questions than answers.  But what is clear is that the Mormon sojourn in Missouri left a mixed legacy–both negative and positive.  On the negative side, the Mormon presence in Missouri caused Joseph Smith and other church spokesmen to express tolerance for black slavery, which was most evident in the church’s official 1835 statement in which the Latter-day Saints pledged not to “interfere with bond-servants” or “influence them to become dissatisfied with their situations.”  This statement was eventually incorporated as section 134:12 in the Doctrine and Covenants and thus accepted as Mormon church canon.

…

[page 29] In contrast on the positive size is the fact that Mormon black priesthood denial did not emerge during the 1830s, despite the negative developments outlined above, all of which occurred as the Latter-Day Saints struggled to establish their Missouri Zion.  Thus, the central tenet of the Missouri thesis lacks historical credibility.  In fact, the practice of Mormon black priesthood denial was not implemented until 1847, three years after the death of Joseph Smith.  Moreover, at least two African American Latter-day Saints received their priesthood ordinations during the Mormon prophet’s lifetime–the most noteworthy being Elijah Abel.

While there were certainly problems in Missouri, how much of an impact on the priesthood ban were these problems?

I just watched Biblical Authors?  Dr Steve Kellmeyer, author of Fact and Fiction in the Da Vinci Code said,

The Catholic Bible contains more books than the Protestant Bible because of events that happened long before Christ was born.  During the Babylonian exile, the Hebrews were scattered across the Mediterranean and many never returned.  Those who were in the east and never went back to Jerusalem lost their native language.  They were unable to read or write Hebrew after just a few generations.

But they wanted to maintain their connection with their faith.  In order to do this, the Jewish scriptures had to be translated into Greek.  So a hundred years before Christ is born, we have two versions of the Old Testament.  We have the Hebrew canon of scripture, and we have the Greek version of the Old Testament scriptures, and the Greeks themselves wrote additional books that were never translated back into the Hebrew.

This Greek version of scripture is called the Septuagint, and if we look at the New Testament, 80% of the quotes that Jesus and the apostles make to Old Testament scripture are from the Septuagint.  This is important because the Greek version is much more Christological and much more prophetic than the Hebrew versions of the scriptures.  Isaiah is different, for instance; Jeremiah is different, and the differences in the Greek version point much more clearly to Christ than those in the Hebrew.

So when it came to the point that the apostles were proselytizing those in the eastern Mediterranean, and the Hebrews were seeing enormous numbers of their fellow converting to Christianity, they decided to canonize their Old Testament, and the rule the used was, “anything written in Greek was not scripture.”  Why did they pick that rule?  Because the Greek scriptures were so Christological that people would convert simply by reading them.

But it was the Greek scriptures that were used by Jesus and the apostles, that were used constantly during the early church.  When people attempted to attack the scriptures and question what was part of scripture and what wasn’t, the churches decided what actually was and wasn’t scripture.  By the late 300′s and early 400′s, the popes and the councils of the church had defined scripture according to the Septuagint.  The Septuagint as I said had more books.

By the 1500′s when Martin Luther with the faith alone theology, he found that the excessive Christology of the Old Testament also pointed to elements of doctrine that did not support faith alone theology, so he was forced to move back to the Hebrew canon of scripture in order to support the idea that he was bringing forward.  That is why all of the Protestant scriptures now have fewer books in the Old Testament than those that are present in the Catholic Bible.

The interesting point is, up until 1827, there was no version of Protestant scripture that did not include those books.  Luther did not entirely throw them out of the Bible.  He simply lifted them and placed them into an appendix between the Old and the New Testaments.  The first time a Bible was ever printed without was 1827–the English Bible Society first promulgated a Bible that was missing those books.  Prior to that, centuries before it had even been illegal in England to do such a thing under the Protestant kings.  Anyone who put forward a Bible that was missing those books could be beheaded.

Here is a list of the books of the Apocrypha:

1. The First Book of Esdras (also known as Third Esdras)
2. The Second Book of Esdras (also known as Fourth Esdras)
3. Tobit
4. Judith
5. The Additions to the Book of Esther
6. The Wisdom of Solomon
7. Ecclesiasticus, or the Wisdom of Jesus the Son of Sirach
8. Baruch
9. The Letter of Jeremiah (This letter is sometimes incorporated as the last chapter of Baruch. When this is done the number of books is fourteen instead of fifteen.)
10. The Prayer of Azariah and the Song of the Three Young Men
11. Susanna
12. Bel and the Dragon
13. The Prayer of Manasseh
14. The First Book of Maccabees
15. The Second Book of Maccabees

I find it a bit ironic that Mormons and Protestants discuss whether faith or works is more important.  Why don’t we use the Catholic Bible?  Should we really be supporting Luther’s Bible?

The first writer who makes any mention of the Epistles that passed between Jesus Christ and Abgarus, is Eusebius, Bishop of Caesarea, in Palestine, who flourished in the early part of the fourth century.  For their genuineness, he appeals to the public registers and records of the City of Edessa in Mesopotamia, where Abgarus reigned, and where he affirms that he found them written, in the Syriac language.  He published a Greek translation of them in his Ecclesiastical History.

The learned world have been much divided on this subject; but notwithstanding  that the erudite Grabe, with Archbishop Cave, Dr. Parker, and other divines has strenuously contended for their admission into the canon of Scripture, they are deemed apocryphal.  The Rev. Jeremiah Jones observes that the common people in England have this Epistle in their houses, in many places, fixed in a frame, with the picture of Christ before it; and that they generally, with much honesty and devotion, regard it as the word of God, and the genuine Epistle of Christ.

Chapter 1

1 – Abgarus, king of Edessa, to Jesus the good Saviour who appears at Jerusalem, greeting.

2 – I have been informed concerning you and your cures, which are performed without the use of medicines and herbs.

3 – For it is reported that you cause the blind to see, the lame to walk, do both cleanse lepers, and cast out unclean spirits and devils, and restore them to health who have been long diseased, and raisest up the dead;

4 – All which when I heard, I was persuaded of one of these two, viz: either that you are God himself descended from heaven, who do these things, or the son of God.

5 – On this account therefore I have wrote to you, earnestly to desire you would take the trouble of a journey hither, and cure a disease which I am under.

6 – For I hear the Jews ridicule you, and intend you mischief.

7 – My city is indeed small, but neat, and large enough for both of us.

Chapter 2

1 – Abgarus, you are happy, forasmuch as you have believed on me, whom ye have no see.

2 – For it is written concerning me, that those who have seen me should not believe on me, that they who have not seen might believe and live.

3 – As to that part of your letter, which relates to my giving you a visit, I must inform you, that I must fulfil all the ends of my mission in this country, and after that be received up again to him who went me.

4 – But after my ascension I will send one of my disciples, who will cure your disease, and give life to you, and all that are with you.

So, do you think this was really written by Jesus?

The gospel was translated into English and published by Professor Henry Pike in 1697 in Cambridge.  It dates to at least the 3^rd century.  The gospel is a Gnostic gospel, so the portrayals of Jesus are quite different than traditional Christians would expect to see.  Frankly, some of the things in this gospel are just plain weird.

This gospel is a bit longer than some of the other gospels.  For this post, I’ve quoted some stories, and given short summaries of some of the others.  As you can see, Jesus could speak even in the cradle.

Chapter 1

2 – [Caiaphus] relates that Jesus spake even when he was in the cradle, and said to his mother;

3 – Mary, I am Jesus the Son of God….

Chapter 2

1 – And when the time of his circumcision was come, namely, the eighth day, on which the law commanded the child to be circumcised, they circumcised him in a cave.

2 – And the old Hebrew woman took the foreskin (others say she took the navel-string), and preserved it in an alabaster-box of old oil of spikenard.

3 – And she had a son who was a druggist, to whom she said, Take heed thou sell not this alabaster box of spikenard-ointment, although thou shouldst be offered three hundred pence for it.

4 – Now this is that alabaster box which Mary the sinner procured, and poured forth the ointment out of it upon the head and the feet of our Lord Jesus Christ, and wiped if off with the hairs of her head.

…

Ok, I don’t know about you, but I think that is really gross.

Chapter 3

1 – And it came to pass, when the Lord Jesus was born at Bethlehem, a city of Judaea, in the time of Herod the King; this wise men came from the East to Jerusalem, according to the prophecy of Zoradascht [footnote says Zoroaster—I blogged about Zoroastrianism a few years ago] and brought with them offerings; namely gold, frankincense, and myrrh, and worshipped him, and offered to him their gifts.

2 – Then the Lady Mary took one of his swaddling clothes in which the infant was wrapped, and gave it to them instead of a blessing, which they received from her as a most noble present.

…

5 – But they produced the swaddling cloth which St. Mary had given to them, on account whereof they kept a feast.

6 – And having, according to the custom of their country, made a fire, they worshipped it.

7 – And casting the swaddling cloth into it, and kept it.

8 – And when the fire was put out, they took forth the swaddling cloth unhurt, as much as if the fire had not touched it.

9 – Then they began to kiss it, and put it upon their heads and their eyes, saying, This is certainly an undoubted truth, and it is really surprising that the fire could not burn it, and consume it.

10 – Then they took it, and with the greatest respect laid it up among their treasures.

Chapter 4

1 – Now Herod, perceiving that the wise men did delay, and not return to him, called together the preists and wise men…

…

3 – But an angel of the Lord appeared to Joseph in his sleep, and said, Arise, take the child and his mother, and go into Egypt as soon as the cock crows.  So he arose and went.

…

6 – And now he drew near to a great city, in which there was an idol, to which the other idols and gods of Egypt brought their offerings and vows.

…

8 – This priest had a son three years old, who was possessed with a great multitude of devils, who uttered many strange things, and when the devils seized him, walked about naked with his clothes torn, throwing stones at those whom he saw.

…

10 – And all the magistrates and priests of the idols assembled before that idol, and made inquiry there, saying, What means all this consternation, and dread, which has fallen upon all our country?

11 – The idol answered them, The unknown God is come hither, who is truly God; nor is there any one besides him, who is worthy of divine worship; for he is truly the Son of God.

…

13 – And at the same instant this idol fell down, and at his fall the inhabitants of Egypt besides others, ran together.

14 – But the son of the priest, when his usual disorder came upon him, going into the inn, found there Joseph and St. Mary, whom all the rest had left behind and forsook.

15 – And when the Lady St. Mary had washed the swaddling clothes of the Lord Christ, and hanged them out to dry upon a post, the boy possessed with the devil took down one of them, and put it upon his head.

16 – And presently the devils began to come out of his mouth, and fly away in the shape of crows and serpents.

17 – From that time, the boy was healed by the power of the Lord Christ, and he began to sing praises, and give thanks to the Lord who had healed him.

…

Chapter 5

1 – Now Joseph and Mary, when they heard that the idol was fallen down and destroyed, were seized upon with fear and trembling…

…

3 – They went therefore hence to the secret places of robbers, who robbers travelers as they pass by…

4 – The thieves upon their coming heard a great noise, such as the noise of a king with a great army and many horses, and the trumpets sounding as his departure from his own city; at which they were so affrighted as to leave all their booty behind them, and fly away in haste.

5 – …Where is that king, the noise of whose approach the robbers heard, and left us, so that we are now come off safe?

6 – Joseph answered, He will come after us.

Chapter 6

[Jesus heals naked woman possessed of devils.  He also cures a bride made dumb by sorcerer, a leprous woman is cured by washing in Jesus' bathwater, a leprous prince is also cured in same manner.]

Chapter 7

[a man who could not enjoy his wife, freed from his disorder]

11 – It was now winter-time, and the girl went into the parlour where these women were, and found them weeping and lamenting, as before

12 – By them stood a mule, covered over with silk, and an ebony collar hanging down from his neck, whom they kissed, and were feeding.

13 – But when the girl said, How handsome, ladies that mule is!  They replied with tears, and said, This mule, which you see, was our brother, born of this same mother as we.

14 – For when our father died, and left us a very large estate, and we had only this brother, and we endeavored to procure him a suitable match, and though he should be married as other men, some giddy and jealous woman bewitched him without our knowledge.

15 – And we, one night, a little before day, while the doors of the house were all fast shut, saw this our brother was changed into a mule, such as you now see him to be;

16 – And we, in the melancholy condition in which you see us, have applied to all the wise men, magicians, and diviners in the world, but they have been of no service to us.

…

21 – As soon as the women had heard the girl’s discourse, they hastened away to the Lady St. Mary…

22 – And said, O our Lady St. Mary, pity your handmaids for we have no head of our family, no one older than us; no father, or brother to go in and out before us.

23 – But this mule, which you see, was our brother, which some woman by witchcraft have brought into this condition which you see; we therefore entreat you to compassionate us.

24 – Hereupon St. Mary was grieved at their case, and taking the Lord Jesus, put him upon the back of the mule.

25 – And said to her son, O Jesus Christ, restore (or heal) according to thy extraordinary power this mule, and grant him to have again the shape of a man and a rational creature, as he had formerly.

26 – This was scarce said by the Lady St. Mary, but the mule immediately passed into a human form, and became a young man without any deformity.

27 – Then he and his mother and the sisters worshipped the Lady St. Mary, and lifting the child upon their heads, they kissed him, and said, Blessed is thy mother, O Jesus, O Saviour of the world!  Blessed are the eyes which are so happy as to see they.

…

Chapter 8

1 – In their journey from hence they came into a desert country, and were told it was infested with robbers; so Joseph and St. Mary prepared to pass through it in the night.

2 – And as they were going along, behold they saw two robbers asleep in the road, and with them a great number of robbers, who were their confederates, also asleep.

3 – The names of these two were Titus and Damachus; and Titus said to Damachus, I beseech thee let those persons go along quietly, that our company may not perceive anything of them;

4 – But Damachus refusing, Titus again said, I will give thee forty groats, and as a pledge take my girdle, which he gave them before he had done speaking, that he might not open his mouth, or make a noise.

5 – When Lady St. Mary saw the kindness which this robber did show them, she said to him, The Lord God will receive thee to his right hand, and grant the pardon of thy sins.

6 – Then the Lord Jesus answered, and said to his mother, When thirty years are expired, O mother, the Jews will crucify me at Jerusalem.

7 – And these two thieves shall be with me at the same time upon the cross, Titus on my right hand, and Dumachus on my left, and from that time Titus shall go before me into paradise;

8 – And when she had said, God forbid this should be thy lot, O my son, they went on to a city in which were several idols; which, as soon as they came near to it, was turned into hills of sand.

….

12 – Thence they proceeded to Memphis, and saw Pharaoh, and abode three years in Egypt.

13 – And the Lord Jesus did very many miracles in Egypt, which are neither to be found in the Gospel of the Infancy or the Gospel of Perfection.

…

[After Herod dies, they return to Israel.]

Chapter 9

[sick children cured by water wherein Christ was washed]

Chapter 10

[Two wives of a man fight over child.  One woman tries to kill son of other woman.  Mary prophecies that evil woman will die.  She falls in a well.]

Chapter 11

[Bartholomew lies on Christ’s bed and is healed]

Chapter 12

[Leprous woman healed by washing in Christ’s bathwater.  Leprous princess is healed by same method.]

Chapter 13

[Girl possessed by Satan is healed by Christ’s swaddling clothes.]

Chapter 14

1 – Another woman likewise lived there, whose son was possessed by Satan.

2 – This boy, named Judas, as often as Satan seized him, was in clined to bite all that were present; and if he found no one else near him, he would bite his own hands and other parts.

…

5 – Then Judas, who was possessed, came and sat down at the right hand of Jesus.

6 – When Satan was acting upon him as usual, he went about to bite the Lord Jesus.

7 – And because he could not do it, he struck Jesus on the right side, so that he cried out.

8 – And in the same moment Satan went out of the boy, and ran away like a mad dog.

9 – This same boy who struck Jesus, and out of whom Satan went in the form of a dog, was Judas Iscariot, who betrayed him to the Jews.

10 – And that same side, on which Judas struck him, the Jews pierced with a spear.

Chapter 15

1 – And when the Lord Jesus was seven years of age, he was on a certain day with other boys his companions about the same age.

2 – Who when they were at play made clay into several shapes, namely asses, oxen, birds, and other figures,

3 – Each boasting of his own work, and endeavoring to exceed the rest.

4 – Then the Lord Jesus said to the boys, I will command these figures which I have made to walk.

5 – And immediately they moved, and when he commanded them to return, they returned.

6 – He had also made the figures of birds and sparrows, which when he commanded to fly, did fly, and when he commanded to stand still, did stand still; and if he gave them meat and drink, they did eat and drink.

7 – When at length the boys went away, and related these things to their parents, their fathers said to them, Take heed, children for the future, of his company, for he is a sorcerer; shun and avoid him, and from henceforth never play with him.

8-15 [Jesus throws a bunch of linens at a shop in the fire.  The store owner is upset, so Jesus retrieves them from the fire unharmed.]

Chapter 16

[Joseph spends 2 years making a throne for the king of Jerusalem.  It is too small, so Jesus miraculously enlarges the throne.]

Chapter 17

[Jesus plays hide and seek with some boys.  Some women throw the boys into a furnace, but Jesus transforms them into baby goats—kids.  Then Jesus transforms them back into boys, unharmed by the furnace.]

Chapter 18

[Serpent bites Simon the Canaanite as a boy.  Jesus causes serpent to suck back the poison, and then the serpent bursts.  Simon is cured.]

Chapter 19

[James is bitten by viper and cured.  Jesus accused of throwing boy off roof.  Jesus causes dead boy to live and the boy acquits Jesus.  Pitcher breaks, and Jesus restores water to pitcher.]

16 – Again on another day the Lord Jesus was with some boys by a river and they drew water out of the river by little channels, and made little fish-pools.

17 – But the Lord Jesus had made twelve sparrows, and placed them about his pool on each side, three on a side.

18 – But it was the Sabbath day, and the son of Hanani a Jew came by, and saw them making these things, and said, Do ye thus make figures of clay on the Sabbath?  And he ran to them and broke down the fish-pools.

19 – But when the Lord Jesus clapped his hands over the sparrows which he had made, the flew away chirping.

20 – At length the son of Hanani coming to the fish-pool of Jesus to destroy it, the water vanished away, and the Lord Jesus said to him,

21 – In like manner as this water has vanished, so shall thy life vanish; and presently the boy died.

22 – Another time, when the Lord Jesus was coming home in the evening with Joseph, he met a boy, who ran so hard against him, that he threw him down;

23 – To whom the Lord Jesus said, As thou hast thrown me down, so shalt thou fall, nor ever rise.

24 – And that moment the boy fell down and died.

Chapter 20

[Jesus sent to school to learn the alphabet, but teaches the schoolmaster, then he is sent to another teacher…]

13 – They brought him then to a more learned master, who when he saw him, said, say Aleph.

14 – And when he had said Aleph, the master bade him pronounce Beth; to which the Lord Jesus replied, Tell me first the meaning of the letter Aleph, and then I will pronounce Beth.

15 – But this master, when he lift up his hand to whip him, had his hand presently withered, and he died.

16 – Then said Joseph to St. Mary, henceforth we will not allow him to go out of the house; for every one who displeases him is killed.

Chapter 21

[At 12 years old, Jesus teaches in the temple about astronomy and many other subjects.]

Chapter 22

[Jesus begins concealing his miracles.  He is baptized at age 30.]

In reviewing my next post, I decided to add some information concerning a very similar gospel titled, Thomas’s Gospel of the Infancy of Jesus Christ.  This gospel is just a fragment containing just over 3 chapters.  Chapter 1 discusses te4h same incident where Jesus animates clay sparrows on the Sabbath Day, along with another story of Jesus clearing water after the rain.  Chapter 2 discusses a boy withering after tearing down Jesus’ fish pool, and Jesus mostly restoring him to health, with the warning,

6 – Then Jesus at the request of all who were present did heal him, leaving only some small member to continue withered, that they might take warning.

Jesus goes on to blind some accusers.  When people complain,

18 – And when they say this action of Christ, Joseph arose, and plucked him by the ear, at which the boy was angry and said to him, Be easy;

In Chapter 3, Jesus astonishes a schoolmaster again with the alphabet.  Chapter 4 is just 2 verses, and appears to tell the same tale as Jesus in the dyer’s shop, though the rest of the book is missing.  As far as background, this is the only background given.

The original in Greek, from which this translation is made, will be found printed by Cotelerius, in his notes on the constitutions of the Apostles, from a MS, in the French King’s Library, No. 2279–It is attributed to Thomas, and conjectured to have originally been connected with the Gospel of Mary.

So what do you make of these stories?  Obviously, some of these are a bit outlandish–humans are turned into animals and back; Jesus kills people that ticked him off.  Jesus seems a bit capricious in some of these stories.

There are some strange stories in the New Testament as well.  What do you make of some of the more outlandish stories in the New Testament–Jesus walking on water, turning water to wine?  Do you think these more accepted New Testament stories could be just as outlandish as the stories in this gospel?

The Protevangelion fills in many of these details.  The subtitle of the book is quite long: An Historical Account of the BIRTH of CHRIST, and the Perpetual VIRGIN MARY, his Mother, by JAMES THE LESSER, Cousin and Brother of the Lord Jesus, chief Apostle and first Bishop of the Christians.  Now this is the same James that I blogged about previously as the leader of ancient Christians (rather than the traditional Peter.)

Apparently this gospel was considered canonical among eastern Christians, but generates some controversy because it states that Joseph was a much older widower before marrying Mary.  Some ancient church fathers disputes this and state that Joseph was a virgin as well.  It is believed this manuscript was originally composed in Hebrew.  Postellus translated it into Latin.  This version I will quote below was printed in 1552 in Zurich.

The first few chapters are similar to the gospel of the birth of Mary, discussing Joachim and Anna’s failure to conceive a child.  In this gospel, Anna complains that even the birds can conceive.  I won’t reference that part of the story since it is similar, but there are some interesting facts about Mary’s childhood.  For example, she walks 9 steps at 9 months of age, and dances in the temple at age 3.  But since I discussed her childhood previously, I’ll leave that for now.

I want to discuss some interesting events about John the Baptist, his father Zacharias, and the more detailed account of discord between Mary and Joseph at her unexpected pregnancy.  As you remember from my previous post, there was some Jewish custom about rods for the betrothal of the virgins at the temple.  Zacharias plays a prominent role in this story, as he helps Mary find a husband.

Chapter 8

6 – And behold the angel of the Lord came to him and said, Zacharias, Zacharias, Go forth and call together all the widowers of the people, and let every one of them bring his rod, and he by whom the Lord shall shew a sign shall be the husband of Mary.

7 – And the criers went out through all Judaea, and the trumpet of the Lord sounded, and all the people ran and met together.

8 – Joseph also, throwing away the hatchet, went out to meet them; and when they were met, they went to the high-priest, taking every man his rod.

9 – After the high-priest had received their rods, he went into the temple to pray;

10 – And when he had finished his prayer, he took the rods, and went forth and distributed them, and there was no miracle attended them.

11 – The last rod was taken by Joseph, and behold a dove proceeded out of the rod, and flew upon the head of Joseph.

12 – And the high-priest said, Joseph, Thou art the person chosen to take the Virgin of the Lord, to keep her for him;

13 – But Joseph refused, saying, I am an old man, and have children, but she is young, and I fear lest I should appear ridiculous in Israel.

14 – Then the high-priest replied, Joseph, fear the Lord they God, and remember how God dealt with Dathan, Korah, and Abiram, how the earth opened and swallowed them up, because of their contradiction.

15 – Now therefore, Joseph, fear God, lest the like things should happen in your family.

16 – Joseph then being afraid, took her into his house, and Joseph said unto Mary, Behold, I have taken thee from the temple of the Lord, and now I must go to mind my trade of building.  The Lord be with thee.

Chapter 9 – [Mary meets with angel, learns of Elizabeth’s pregnancy, Zacharias can’t speak]

23 – But perceiving herself daily to grow big, and being afraid, she went home and hid herself from the children of Israel; and was fourteen years old when all these things happened.

Chapter 10

1 – And when her sixth month was come, Joseph returned home from his building houses abroad, which was his trade, and entering into the house, found the Virgin grown big:

2 – Then smiting upon his face, he said, With what face can I look up to the Lord my God?  Or, what shall I say concerning this young woman?

3 – For I received her a Virgin out of the temple of the Lord my god, and have not preserved her such!

4 – Who has thus deceived me?  Who has committed this evil in my house, and seducing the Virgin from me, hath defiled her?

5 – Is not the history of Adam exactly accomplished in me?

6 – For in the very instant of his glory, the serpent came and found Even, and seduced her.

7 – Just after the same manner it has happened to her.

8 – Then Joseph arising from the ground, called her, and said, O thou who hast been so favored by God, why hast thou done this?

9 – Why hast thou thus debased thy soul, who wast educated in the Holy of Holies, and received thy food from the hand of angels?

10 – But she, with a flood of tears, replied, I am innocent, and have known no man.

11 – Then said Joseph, How comes it to pass that you are with child?

12 – Mary answered, As the Lord my God liveth, I know not by what means.

13 – Then Joseph was exceedingly afraid, and went away from her, considering what he should do with her, considering what he should do with her; and he thus reasoned with himself;

14 – If I conceal her crime, I shall be found guilty by the law of the Lord;

15 – And if I discover her to the children of Israel, I fear, lest she being with child by an angel, I shall be found to betray the life of an innocent person;

16 – What therefore shall I do?  I will privately dismiss her.

17 – Then the night was come upon him, when behold an angel of the Lord appeared to him in a dream, and said,

18 – Be not afraid to take that young woman, for that which is within her is of the Holy Ghost;

19 – And she shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his name Jesus, for he shall save his people from their sins.

20 – Then Joseph arose from his sleep, and glorified the God of Israel, who had shown him such favour, and preserved the Virgin.

Chapter 11

1 – Then came Annas the scribe, and said to Joseph, Wherefore have we not seen you since your return?

2 – And Joseph replied, Because I was weary after my journey, and rested the first day.

3 – But Annas turning about perceived the Virgin big with child.

4 – And went away to the priest, and hold him, Joseph in whom you placed so much confidence, is guilty of a notorious crime, in that he hath defiled the Virgin whom he received out of the temple of the Lord, and hath privately married her, not discovering it to the children of Israel.

5 – Then said the priest, Hath Joseph done this?

6 – Annas replied, If you send any of your servants, you will find that she is with child.

7 – And the servants went, and found it as he said.

8 – Upon this both she and Joseph were brought to their trial, and the priest said unto her, Mary what hast thou done?

9 – Why hast thou debased thy soul, and forgot they God, seeing thou wast brought up in the Holy of Holies, and didst receive thy food from the  hands of angels, and heardest their songs?

10 – Why hast thou done this?

11 – To which with a flood of tears she answered, As the Lord my God liveth, I am innocent in his sight, seeing I know no man.

12 – Then the priest said to Joseph, Why hast thou done this?

13 – And Joseph answered, As the Lord my God liveth, I have not been concerned with her

14 – But the priest said, Lie not, but declare the truth; thou hast privately married her, and not discovered it to the children of Israel, and humbled thyself under the mighty hand (of God), that they seed might be blessed.

15 – And Joseph was silent.

16 – Then said the priest (to Joseph), You must restore to the temple of the Lord the Virgin which you took thence.

17 – But he wept bitterly, and the priest added, I will cause you both to drink the water of the Lord, which is for trial, and so your iniquity shall be laid open before you.

18 – Then the priest took the water, and made Joseph drink, and sent him to a mountainous place.

19 – And he returned perfectly well, and all the people wondered that his guilt was not discovered.

20 – So the priest said, Since the Lord hath not made your sins evident, neither do I condemn you.

21 – So he sent them away.

22 – Then Joseph took Mary and went to his house, rejoicing and praising the God of Israel.

Chapter 12

1 – And it came to pass, that there went forth a decree from the Emporer Augustus, that all the Jews should be taxed, who were of Bethlehem in Judaea;

2 – And Joseph said, I will take care that my children be taxed; but what shall I do with this young woman?

3 – To have her taxed as my wife I am ashamed; and if I tax her as my daughter, all Israel knows she is not my daughter.

4 – When the time of the Lord’s appointment shall come, let him do as seems good to him.

5 – And he saddled the ass, and put her upon it, and Joseph and Simon followed after her, and arrived at Bethlehem within three miles.

6 – Then Joseph turning about saw Mary sorrowful, and said within himself, Perhaps she is in pain through that which is within her.

7 – But when he turned about again he saw her laughing, and said to her,

8 – Mary, how happens it that sometimes I see sorrow, and sometimes I see laughter and joy in thy countenance?

9 – And Mary replied to him, I see two people with mine eyes, the one weeping and mourning, and other laughing and rejoicing.

10 – And he went again across the way, and Mary said to Joseph, Take me down from the ass, for that which is in me presses to come forth.

11 – But Joseph replied, Whither shall I take thee? For the place is a desert.

12 – Then said Mary again to Joseph, take me down, for that which is within me mightily presses me.

13 – And Joseph took her down.

14 – And he found there was a cave, and let her into it.

Chapter 13

1 – And leaving her and his sons in the cave, Joseph went forth to seek a Hebrew midwife in the village in Bethlehem….

Chapter 14

…

3 – She replied to me, Where is the woman that is to be delivered?

4 – And I answered, In the cave, and she is betrothed to me.

5 – Then said the midwife, Is she not thy wife?

6 – Joseph answered, It is Mary, who was educated in the Holy of Holies, in the house of the Lord, and she fell to my lot, and it not my wife, but has conceived by the Holy Ghost.

7 – The midwife said, Is this true?

8 – He answered, Come and see.

9 – And the midwife went along with him, and stood in the cave.

10 – Then a bright cloud overshadowed the cave, and the midwife said, This day my soul is magnified, for mine eyes have seen surprising things, and salvation is brought forth to Israel.

11 – But on a sudden the cloud became a great light in the cave, so that their eyes could not bear it.

12 – But the light gradually decreased, until the infant appeared, and sucked the breast of his mother Mary.

13 – Then the midwife cried out, and said, How glorious a day is this, wherein mine eyes have seen this extraordinary sight!

14 – And the midwife went out from the cave, and Salome met her.

15 – And the midwife said to her, Salome, Salome, I will tell you a most surprising thing which I saw,

16 – A virgin hath brought forth, which is a thing contrary to nature.

17 – To which Salome replied, As the Lord my God liveth, unless I receive particular proof of this matter, I will not believe that a virgin hath brought forth.

18 – Then Salome went in, and the midwife said, Mary, shew thyself, for a  great controversy is risen concerning thee.

19 – And Salome received satisfaction.

20 – But her hand was withered, and she groaned bitterly.

21 – And said, Woe to me, because of mine iniquity; for I have tempted the living God, and my hand is ready to drop off.

22 – Then Salome made her supplication to the Lord, and said, O God of my fathers, remember me, for I am of the seed of Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob.

23 – Make me not a reproach among the children of Israel, but restore me sound to my parents.

24 – For thou well knowest, O Lord, that I have performed many offices of charity in thy name, and have received my reward from thee.

25 – Upon this an angel of the Lord stood by Salome, and said, The Lord God hath heard they prayer, reach forth thy hand to the child, and carry him, and by that means thou shalt be restored.

26 – Salome, filled with exceeding joy, went to the child, and said, I will touch him;

27 – And she purposed to worship him, for she said, This is a great king which is born in Israel.

28 – And straightway Salome was cured.

29 – Then the midwife went out of the cave, being approved by God.

30 – And Lo! A voice come to Salome, Declare not the strange things which thou hast seen, till the child come to Jerusalem.

31 – So Salome also departed, approved by God.

Chapter 15

1 – Then Joseph was preparing to go away, because there arose a great disorder in Bethlehem by the coming of some wise men from the east,

2 – Who said, Where is the king of the Jews born?  For we have seen his star in the east and are come to worship him.

3 – When Herod heard this, he was exceedingly troubled, and sent messengers to the wise men, and to the priests, and inquired of them in the town-hall,

4 – And said unto them, Where have you it written concerning Christ the king, or where should he be born?

5 – Then they say unto him, In Bethlehem in Judaea; for this it is written: And thou Bethlehem in the land of Judah are not the least among the princes of Judah, for out of thee shall rule my people Israel.

6 – And having sent away the chief priests, he inquired of the wise men in the town-hall, and said unto them, What sign was it ye saw concerning the king that is born?

7 – They answered him, We saw an extraordinary large star shining among the stars of heaven, and so out-shined all the other stars, as that they became not visible, and we knew thereby that a great king was born in Israel, and therefore we are come to worship him.

8 – Then said Herod to them, Go and make diligent inquiry; and if ye find the child, bring me word again, that I may come and worship him also.

9 – So the wise men went forth, and behold, the star which they saw in the east went before them, till it came and stood over the cave where the young child was with Mary his mother

10 – Then they brought forth out of their treasures, and offered unto him gold and frankincense, and myrrh.

11 – And being warned in a dream by an angel, that they should not return to Herod through Judaea, they departed into their own country by another way.

Chapter 16

1 – Then Herod perceiving that he was mocked by the wise men, and being very angry, commanded certain men to go and to kill all the children that were in Bethlehem, from two years old and under.

2 – But Mary hearing that the children were to be killed, being under much fear, took the child, and wrapped him up in swaddling clothes, and laid him in an ox-manger, because there was no room for them in the inn.

3 – Elizabeth also, hearing that her son John was about to be searched for, took him and went up unto the mountains, and looked for a place to hide him;

4 – And there was no secret place to be found.

5 – Then she groaned within herself and said, O mountain of the Lord, receive the mother with the dhild.

6 – For Elizabeth could not climb up.

7 – And instantly the mountain was divided and received them.

8 – And there appeared to them an angel of the Lord, to preserve them.

9 – But Herod made search after John, and sent servants to Zacharias, when he was (ministering) at the altar, and said unto him, Where hast thou hid thy son?

10 – He replied to them, I am a minister of God, and a servant at the altar; how should I know where my son is?

11 – So the servants went back, and told Herod the whole; at which he was incensed, and said, Is not this son of his like to be king in Israel?

12 – He sent therefore again his servants to Zacharias, saying, Tell us the truth were is they son, for you know that your life is in my hand.

13 – So the servants went and told him all this;

14 – But Zacharias replied to them, I am a martyr for god, and if he shed my blood, the Lord will receive my soul.

15 – Besides know that he shed innocent blood.

16 – However Zacharias was murdered in the entrance of the temple and altar, and about the partition;

17 – But the children of Israel knew not when he was killed.

18 – Then at the hour of salutation the priests went into the temple, but Zacharias did not according to his custom meet them and bless them;

19 – Yet they still continued waiting for him to salute them;

20 – And when they found he did not in a long time come, one of them ventured into the holy place where the altar was, and he saw blood lying upon the ground congealed;

21 – When, behold a voice from heaven said, Zacharias is murdered, and his blood shall not be wiped away, until the revenger of his blood come.

22 – But when he heard this, he was afraid, and went forth and told the priests what he had seen and heard; and they all went in and saw the fact.

23 – Then the roofs of the temple howled, and were rent from the top to the bottom;

24 – And they could not find the body, but only blood made hard like stone.

25 – And they went away, and told the people, that Zacharias of Israel heard thereof and mourned for him, and lamented three days.

26 – Then the priests took counsel together concerning a person to succeed him.

27 – And Simeon and the other priests cast lots, and the lot fell upon Simeon.

28 – For he had been assured by the Holy Spirit, that he should not die, till he had seen Christ come in the flesh.

[I James wrote the History  in Jerusalem; and when the disturbance was I retired into a desert  place, until the death of Herod.  And the disturbances ceased at Jerusalem.  That which remains is, that I glorify God that he hath given me such wisdom to write unto you who are spiritual, and who love God; to whom (be ascribed) glory and dominion for ever and ever.  Amen.]

So how much validity is there to this story?  Do you think Zacharias may have been killed defending the location of John the Baptist?  How real were the arguments between Joseph and Mary?  Do you think Joseph was a much older widower than Mary?  What problems do you see with this gospel?

The first 4 books deal with the childhood of Jesus.  With the Christmas season approaching, I wanted to share some of these really cool stories about Jesus, Mary, and Joseph.  I think you’ll enjoy learning some of the extra-biblical stories.  Honestly, I don’t think I’ve read so much cool stuff about the life of Jesus.  I want to start with the Gospel of the Birth of Mary, and discuss some of these other ancient writings in coming weeks.  Some of these stories overlap, and I think it will be interesting to see the different, sometimes conflicting accounts over the coming weeks.

Before I get into the actual gospel, I want to give some background on this particular document.  This gospel has been attributed to Matthew, and the version in the book dates to the 4^th century.  The book was found in the works of St. Jerome.  Some of his contemporaries mentioned the gospel as well, such as Epiphanius, Bishop of Salamis, and Austin.  Some of the ancient copies differed from Jerome’s version (I will quote from Jerome’s version).

The book states that Mary was from the house of David, but Faustus, Bishop of Riez disagreed, saying Mary was from Levi.  We know that Mary and Elizabeth were cousins.  Elizabeth was with wife of Zacharias, priest in the temple, and therefore of the Tribe of Levi.  Jesus went to John the Baptist who held the proper authority, so a good case can be made that Mary might have been from Levi.  Apparently Muslims believe Mary was from Levi.  This gospel clearly states Mary was a descendant of David, who was the tribe of Judah.

The ancient group Collyridians imagined that both Mary and Jesus were the result of an “immaculate conception”, both being born of a virgin.  This gospel seems to show that Mary’s parents, Joachim and Anna, had fertility problems just like Abraham and Sarah and Rachel and Jacob.  (I snipped that out of my excerpts below, but the angel clearly mentions this to Anna.)  Collyridians are an interesting group, and are considered heretical Christians.  Some believe they thought Mary was a goddess.  This Wikipedia article says that Mohammad believed that Mary was the 3^rd member of the Trinity.  That’s an interesting idea, but the gospel states that “the Holy Ghost shall come upon you, and the power of the Most High shall overshadow you, without any of the heats of lust.”  I’ve heard of a Father, Mother, and Son being part of the Trinity—kind of a “holy family” and that makes some logical sense.  But the references to the Holy Ghost in the Bible seem to be quite separate from Mary (such as when the Holy Ghost descended in the form of a dove at Jesus’ baptism), so I think it’s a bit of a stretch to put Mary in the Godhead or Trinity, despite how appealing that might be.

So, let’s look at Jerome’s copy.  So that this isn’t too long, I will only cite the parts I find particularly interesting, and will reference chapters and verses.

Chapter 1

1 – The blessed and ever glorious Virgin Mary, sprung from the royal race and family of David, was born in the city of Nazareth, and educated at Jerusalem, in the temple of the Lord.

2 – Her father’s name was Joachim, and her mother’s Anna.  The family of her father was of Galilee and the city of Nazareth.  The family of her mother was of Bethlehem.

…

7 – And it came to pass when the feast of the dedication drew near, Joachim, with some others of his tribe, went up to Jerusalem, and at that time, Issachar was high priest;

8 – Who, when he saw Joachim along with the rest of his neighbors, bringing his offering, despised both him and his offerings…

….[priest is especially cruel]

11 – But Joachim being much confounded with shame, retired to the shepherds, who were with cattle in their pastures;

12 – For he was not inclined to return home, lest his neighbors, who were present and heard all this from the high priest, should publicly reproach him in the same manner.

Chapter 2

1 – But when he had been there for some time, on a certain day when he was alone, the angel of the Lord stood by him with a prodigious light.

2 – To whom, being troubled at the appearance, the angel who had appeared to him, endeavoring to compose him said;

3 – Be not afraid, Joachim, nor troubled at the sight of me, for I am an angel of the Lord sent by him to you, that I might inform you, that your prayers are heard, and your alms are ascended in the sight of God.

4 – For He hath surely seen your shame, and heard you unjustly reproached for not having children: for God is the avenger of sin; and not of nature;

5 – And so when he shuts up the womb of any person, he does it for this reason, that he may in a more wonderful manner again open it and that which is born appear to be not the product of lust, but the gift of God.

…[Angel discusses Sarah, Rachel as barren women as well]

9 – …Anna your wife shall bring you a daughter and you shall call her name Mary;

10 – She shall, according to your vow, be devoted to the Lord from her infancy, and be filled with the Holy Ghost from her mother’s womb;

11 – She shall neither eat nor drink anything which is unclean; nor shall her conversation be without among the common people, but in the temple of the Lord; that so she may not fall under suspicion of what is bad.

12 – So in the process of her years, as she shall be in a miraculous manner be born to one that is barren, so she shall, while yet a virgin, in a way unparalleled, bring forth the Son of the Most High God, who shall be called Jesus, and according to the signification of his name, be the Savior of all nations.

…

Chapter 3

1 – Afterwards the angel appeared unto Anna his wife saying: Fear not, neither think that which ye see is a spirit.

2 – For I am the angel who hath offered up your prayers and alms before God, and am now sent to you, that I may inform you that a daughter will be born unto you, who shall be called Mary, and shall be blessed above all women.

3 – She shall be, immediately upon her birth, full of grace of the Lord, and shall continue the three years of her weaning in her father’s house, and afterwards, being devoted to the service of the Lord, shall not depart from the temple, till she arrives at the years of discretion.

4 – But, being an unparalleled instance without any pollution or defilement, and a virgin not knowing any man shall bring forth a son, and a maid shall bring forth the Lord, who both by grace and the name of his works, shall be the Savior of the world.

…

11 – So Anna conceived, and brought forth a daughter, and according to the angel’s command, the parents called her name Mary.

Chapter 4

1 – And when the three years were expired, and the time of her weaning complete, they brought the Virgin to the temple of the Lord with offerings.

2- And there were about the temple, according to the Psalms of degrees, fifteen stairs to ascend.

…

4 – The parents of the blessed Virgin and infant Mary put her upon one of the stairs;

5 – But while they were putting off their clothes…

6 – …the Virgin of the Lord in such a manner went up all the stairs one after another, without the help of any to lead or lift her, that one would have judged from hence that she was of perfect age.

7 – Thus the Lord did, in the infancy of his Virgin, work this extraordinary work…

8 – But the parent having offered up their sacrifice, according to the custom of the law, left the Virgin with other virgins in the apartments of the temple, who were brought up there, and they returned home.

Chapter 5

1 – But the Virgin of the Lord, as she advanced in years, increased also in perfections, and according to the Psalmist, her father and mother forsook her, but the Lord took care of her.

2 – For she every day had the conversation of angels, and every day received visitors from God, which preserved her from all sorts of evil, and caused her to abound with all good things;

3 – So that when at length she arrived to her fourteenth year, as the wicked could not lay anything to her charge worthy of reproof, so all good persons, who were acquainted with her, admired her life and conversation.

4 – At that time the high-priest made a public order.  That all the virgins who had public settlements in the temple, and were come to this age, should return home, and as they were now of a proper maturity, should according to the custom of their country, endeavor to be married.

5 – To which command, though all the other virgins readily yielded obedience, Mary the Virgin of the Lord alone answered, that she could not comply with it.

6 – Assigning these reasons, that both she and her parents had devoted her to the service of the Lord; and besides, that she had vowed virginity to the Lord, which vow she was resolved never to break through by lying with a man.

7 – The high priest being herby brought into a difficulty,

8 – Seeing he durst neither on the one hand dissolve the vow, and disobey the Scripture, which says, Vow and pay,

9 – Nor on the other hand introduce a custom, to which the people were strangers commanded,

10 – That at the approaching feast all the principal persons both of Jerusalem and the neighbouring places should meet together, that he might have their advice, how he had best proceed in so difficult a case.

…

12 – And when they were all engaged in prayer, the high-priest, according to the usual way, went to consult God.

13 – And immediately there was a voice from the ark, and the mercy seat, which all present heard, that it must be inquired or sought out by a prophecy of Isaiah to whom the Virgin should be given and be betrothed;

…

16 – Then according to this prophecy, he appointed that all the men of the house and family of David, who were marriageable, and not married, should bring their several rods to the altar,

17 – And out of whatsoever person’s rod after it was brought, a flower should bud forth, and on the top of it the Spirit of the Lord should sit in the appearance of a dove, he should be the man to whom the Virgin should be betrothed.

Chapter 6

1 – Among the rest there was a man named Joseph, of the house and family of David, and a person very far advanced in years, who drew back his rod, when every one besides presented his.

2 – So that when nothing appeared agreeable to the heavenly voice, the high-priest judged it proper to consult God again.

3 – Who answered that he whom the virgin was to be betrothed was the only person of those who were brought together, who had not brought his rod.

4 – Joseph therefore was betrayed.

5 – For when he did bring his rod, and a dove coming from Heaven pitched upon the top of it, every one plainly saw, that the Virgin was to be betrothed to him;

6 – According to the usual ceremonies of betrothing being over, he returned to his own city of Bethlehem, to set his house in order, and make the needful provisions for the marriage.

7 – But the Virgin of the Lord, Mary with seven other virgins of the same age, who had been weaned at the same time, and who had been appointed to attend her by the priest, returned to her parent’s house in Galilee.

Chapter 7

…[angel appears to Mary]

8 – Fear not Mary, as though I intended anything inconsistent with your chastity in this salutation;

9 – For you have found favour with the Lord, because you made virginity your choice.

10 – Therefore while you are a Virgin, you shall conceive without sin, and bring forth a son.

11 – He shall be great, because he shall reign from sea to the sea, and from the rivers to the ends of the earth

….

16 – She said, How can that be?  For seeing, according to my vow, I have never known any man, how can I bear a child without the addition of a man’s seed?

17 – To this the angel replied and said, Think not Mary, that you shall conceive in the ordinary way.

18 – For without lying with a man, while a Virgin, you shall conceive; while a Virgin, you shall bring forth; and while a Virgin shall give suck.

19 – For the Holy Ghost shall come upon you, and the power of the Most High shall overshadow you, without any of the heats of lust.

20 – So that which shall be born of you shall be only holy, because it only is conceived without sin, and being born, shall be called the Son of God.

21 – Then Mary stretching forth her hands and lifting her eyes to heaven, said, Behold the handmaid of the Lord!  Let it be unto me according to thy word.

Chapter 8

1 – Joseph therefore went from Judaea to Galilee, with intention to marry the Virgin who was betrothed to him:

2 – For it was now near three months since she was betrothed to him.

3 – At length it plainly appeared she was with child, and it could not be hid from Joseph:

4 – For going to the Virgin in a free manner, as one espoused, and talking familiarly with her, he perceived her to be with child.

5 – And thereupon began to be uneasy and doubtful, not knowing what course it would be best to take;

6 – For being a just man, he was not willing to expose her, nor defame her by the suspicion of being a whore, since he was a pious man.

7 – He purposed therefore privately to put an end to their agreement, and as privately to put her away.

8 – But while he was meditating these things, behold an angel of the Lord appeared to him in his sleep, and said Joseph, son of David, fear not;

9 – Be not willing to entertain any suspicion of the Virgin’s being guilty of fornication, or to think any thing amiss of her, neither be afraid to take her to wife;

10 – For that which is begotten in her and now distresses your mind, is not the work of man, but the Holy Ghost.

11 – For she of all women is that only Virgin who shall bring forth the Son of God, and you shall call his name Jesus, that is, Saviour: for he will save his people from their sins.

12 – Joseph thereupon according to the command of the angel, married the Virgin, and did not know her, but kept her in chastity.

13 – And now the ninth month from her conception drew near, when Joseph took his wife and what other things were necessary to Bethlehem, the city from whence he came.

14 – And it came to pass, while they were there, the days were fulfilled for her bringing forth her first-born son, as the holy Evangelists have taught, even our Lord Jesus Christ, who with the Father, Son, and the Holy Ghost, lives and reigns to everlasting ages.

{The End}

So what do you make of this gospel?  Some have claimed that the biblical use of the word “virgin” simply meant young woman, but this gospel makes specific mention of Mary’s virginity and chastity.  On the other hand, there must have been quite some rumors about Mary’s out of wedlock pregnancy.  My next post will discuss another book called the Protevangelion.  It gives a lot more detail about Joseph’s concern about Mary’s pregnancy.  (If you thought this gospel was cool, the Protevangelion is even better!)  Here are some questions to consider.

• Have you ever heard that Mary’s birth was miraculous?  What do you make of this story of her birth?
• Did you have any idea Mary grew up in the temple?
• Did you know Joseph didn’t want to marry Mary even before she appeared pregnant?  I’m sure it is because Joseph was “far advanced in years” – perhaps Joseph was old enough to be her father (That’s the take in the Protevangelion.)
• What do you think of her conversations with angels “every day”?
• How historically accurate do you think some of these events are from the life of Mary?
• While I don’t expect Mormons to have very much of an issue with Mary’s lineage, what do you make of the dispute about her ancestry (Judah or Levi)?
• What do you make of the emphasis in this gospel of her chastity?
• Do you think Mary’s role and miraculous experiences are under-emphasized (undervalued) in the biblical gospels?  Do you think it would have been nice if this gospel had been included in the biblical canon?

Following her presentation, I asked her if she would share her PowerPoint presentation, which she graciously did.  I have intended to post this much sooner, but have had a backlog of posts on Mormon Schismatic groups (see my Introduction, and details about Fundamentalist Mormons, the Bickertonites,  the Strangites) and the David O McKay Biography (first and second posts), to go along with the Mormon Matters implosion.  I’m finally getting around to Jack’s presentation.  (Better late than never, right?)  If you’d like a copy of her PowerPoint slides, she has made them available on this link to her website.

In her presentation, she said that “female priesthood” is a somewhat anachronistic term, but it is clear that women participated in ordinances that we would consider priesthood ordinances.  She noted that in the New Testament period and onward, there is evidence for

• Women as apostles, bishops, elders, priests and deacons
• Women performing baptisms and administering the Eucharist

She references several types of evidence to support this position

• New Testament data
• Canonical commentary
• Early Christian texts
• Inscriptions on monuments
• Artistic depictions of women
• Polemical evidence (church fathers condemning the already existing practice of ordaining women.)

She references Romans 16:7, which references Andronicus and Junia.  Some translators changed the name Junia (female) to Junis (male.)  Clearly Junia was an apostle.  Early Christian Father John Chrysostum (who lived from 347-405 AD) is quoted as saying,

Greet Andronicus and Junia…who are among the apostles’:  To be an apostle is something great. But to be outstanding among the apostles—just think what a wonderful song of praise that is! They were outstanding on the basis of their works and virtuous actions. Indeed, how great the wisdom of this woman must have been that she was even deemed worthy of the title of apostle.” (In ep. ad Romanos 31.2)

Jack refers to female Deacons in Romans 16:1-2 and 1 Tim 3:8-11.

“I commend to you our sister Phoebe, a deacon of the church at Cenchreae, so that you may welcome her in the Lord as is fitting for the saints, and help her in whatever she may require from you, for she has been a benefactor of many and of myself as well.”

“Deacons likewise must be serious, not double-tongued, not indulging in much wine, not greedy for money;  they must hold fast to the mystery of the faith with a clear conscience. And let them first be tested; then, if they prove themselves blameless, let them serve as deacons. Women likewise must be serious, not slanderers, but temperate, faithful in all things.”

Ancient Church Father Origen (185-253) also discussed Phoebe.

“’I commend to you Phoebe . . .’ This passage teaches by apostolic authority that women also are appointed in the ministry of the church, in which office Phoebe was placed at the church that is in Cenchreae. Paul with great praise and commendation even enumerates her splendid deeds . . . And therefore this passage teaches two things equally and is to be interpreted, as we have said, to mean that women are to be considered ministers in the church, and that such ought to be received into the ministry who have assisted many; they have earned the right through their good deeds to receive apostolic praise.” (Commentary on Romans 10.17)

John Chrysostum discussed 1 Tim 3:11,

“’Likewise women must be modest, not slanderers, sober, faithful in everything.’ Some say that he is talking about women in general. But that cannot be. Why would he want to insert in the middle of what he is saying something about women? But rather, he is speaking of those women who hold the rank of deacon. ‘Deacons should be husbands of one wife.’ This is also appropriate for women deacons, for it is necessary, good, and right, most especially in the church.” (Homily 11)

Theodoret of Cyrrus (lived 393-460 AD) said,

“’In the same way, women’ that is, the deacons, ‘are to be serious, not irresponsible talkers, sober, faithful in everything.’ What he directed for the men, he did similarly for the women. Just as he told the male deacons to be serious, he said the same for the women. As he commanded the men not to be two-faced, so he commanded the women not to talk irresponsibly. And as he commanded the men not to drink much wine, so he ordered the women should be temperate.” (Commentary on 1 Timothy)

Jack refers other women mentioned in the New Testament.  The following are definite or probable church house leaders.

1. Lydia (Acts 16:14-15; 40),
2. Nympha (Col. 4:15),
3. Chloe (1 Cor. 1:11),
4. Stephanas (1 Cor. 16:15-16),
5. Priscilla (Rom. 16:3-5),
6. and possibly the “elect lady” and her “chosen sister” in 2 John.
7. Euodia & Synteche are mentioned in Philippians 4:2-3.  Theodore of Mopsuestia (c. 350 – 428) read this as a struggle between the two women for leadership.

Some may wonder if a deaconess is simply the wife of a deacon.  However, Jack says that wives of male deacons were generally not given the title of “deaconess”.  She says that descriptions of their function don’t start appearing until the late second and early third centuries.  She also shows a painting possibly depicting women administering the Eucharist (LDS refer to this as the Sacrament.)  Archaeologists are split as to whether this truly represents the Sacrament.

In the 5^th century, Testamentum Domini 2:20 states that if pregnant women could not attend church on Sunday, deaconesses could take the Eucharist to their home.  She also notes that in 511 AD, 3 Gallic bishops were chastised for allowing women to assist with the Eucharist.  This obviously indicates that women were involved in the practice.  Canonical Resolutions 24 (6^th century) states that deaconesses could distribute the Eucharist to their female companions who lived in convents in Edessa.

Jack describes the practice of baptisms by women.  Acts of Paul and Thecla (2^nd century) depicts Thecla performing a self-baptism similar to the story of Alma in Mosiah 18:13-14.  She also notes that early church Father Justinian said it was acceptable for women to baptize as long as they met certain requirements.  In several texts as early as the first half of the third century, female deacons are described as assisting with baptisms and anointing the bodies of the female converts with oil before or after baptism.  In others, it is the women themselves performing the baptisms.

However, such things weren’t popular with everyone.  For example, Tertullian (c. 160 – 220) railed against women performing baptisms (On Baptism 17.4).  Jack gives several examples where baptisms performed by women were criticized.  Church councils in the 5^th and 6^th centuries condemned the practice, and as infant baptism became the norm, fewer adult female converts needed to be baptized, so the practice appears to have died out.

As far as female elders, Jack says there is less evidence; (there is more evidence in the Western Church than Eastern Church.)  She has noted 15 inscriptions referring to the feminine form of “elder”.  Jack says “Since the wives of elders were sometimes called by the term, we can’t be certain that every reference to a female presbyter is meant to denote an ecclesiastical office. However, usually when that was the case, the husband was titled and mentioned along with her.”  Jack showed several inscriptions referring to female elders.  For example, Guilia Runa is noted to have been “presbiterissa”, suggesting that she was a recognized leader of the Church of Saint Augustine in Hippo around the 5^th century AD.  Leta of Tropea, Calabria is noted as “The Presbyter”, but her husband is not honored as an elder.  There are other examples.

Jack mentions that Episcopa Theodora, was the mother of Pope Paschal I.  A painting of her is found in the Church of St. Praxedis, AD 820.  Her husband is mentioned in other texts and is not a bishop.  It appears that vandals tried to scratch off the “a” in “episcopa” in an attempt to obscure her gender.  Other inscriptions include:

1. “Here lies the venerable woman, bishop Q (uenerabilis fem[ina] episcopa Q), buried in peace for five [years] . . . +Olybrio.”  It is a damaged inscription at St. Paul’s Basilican Cemetary in Rome, 4^th-6^th century
2. Canon 20 of the Council of Tours (6^th century) mentions an “episcopa Terni”
3. A 5^th century fragmentary inscription is dedicated to a priestess in Solin. A cross on the inscription indicates that it was a Christian priestess, not a pagan one.

I have previously mentioned a heretical group called the Montanists.  Briefly, Montanus lived in the 2^nd Century AD in Turkey, and was an early Christian leader that traveled with 2 prophetesses.  Jack quoted Epiphanius of Salamis (310-403) describing the Montanists: “They consider Quintilla together with Priscilla as founder, the same as Cataphrygians. They bring with them many useless testimonies, attributing special grace to Eve because she first ate of the tree of knowledge. They acknowledge the sister of Moses as a prophetess as support for their practice of appointing women to the clergy. Also, they say, Philip had four daughters who prophesied. Often in their assembly seven virgins dressed in white enter carrying lamps, having come in to prophesy to ecstasy;”

So, there does appear to be ample evidence for female priesthood in the ancient Christian Church.  I would love to hear more from Jack on why female priesthood is considered “anachronistic”, because I don’t fully understand what she means.  But I absolutely loved her presentation, and I loved how she ended her presentation.

• Option 1 – We can Reject or Dismiss this information.  We can say things such as:

-        “We don’t care if apostate Christian groups were ordaining women”

• Option 2 – We could offer a polemic attack against Joseph Smith.

-        We can look at this data and say, “Look what Joseph Smith neglected to restore.”

• Option 3 – We can accept this information.

-        Yes, women did hold a priesthood in ancient times.

-        The 9^th Article of Faith allows that God still has things to reveal; gives Latter-day Saints room to be accepting of this data

Since Jack went to BYU, she is quite familiar with the Mormon concept of an apostasy.  She said, “I think it shows very well how the idea that women had the priesthood and it was taken away can fit into a Mormon apostasy narrative.”

In a letter from Atto, Bishop of Vercelli, wrote to a priest named Ambrose in the 10th century:

“Because your prudence has moved you to inquire how we should understand “female priest” (presbyteram) or “female deacon” (diaconam) in the canons: it seems to me that in the primitive church, according to the word of the Lord, “the harvest was great and the laborers few”; religious women (religiosae mulieres) used also to be ordained as caretakers (cultrices ordinabantur) in the holy church, as Blessed Paul shows in the Letter to the Romans, when he says, “I commend to you my sister Phoebe, who is in the ministry of the church at Cenchrea.” Here it is understood that not only men but also women presided over the churches (sed etiam feminae praeerat ecclesiis) because of their great usefulness. For women, long accustomed to the rites of the pagan and instructed also in philosophical teachings, were, for these reasons, converted more easily and taught more liberally in the worship of religion. This the eleventh canon of the Council of Laodicea prohibits when it says it is not fitting for those women who are called female presbyters (presbyterae) or presiders (praesidentes) to be ordained in the churches. We believe female deacons truly to have been ministers of such things. For we say that a minister is a deacon (diaconum) from which we perceive female deacon (diaconam) to have been derived. Finally, we read in the fifteenth canon of the Council of Chalcedon that a female deacon is not to be ordained before her fortieth year—and this was the highest gravity. We believe women were enjoined to the office of baptizing so that the bodies of other women might be handled by them without any deeply felt sense of shame…as as those who were called female presbyters (presbyterae) assumed the office of preaching, leading, and teaching, so female deacons had taken up the office of ministry and of baptizing, a custom that is no longer expedient.”

Personally, I’ve studied a bit about women and the priesthood, and I have a post planned that will show that Mormon women washed, anointed, and blessed the sick by the laying on of hands right up until 1946.  I agree with Jack that women’s loss of the priesthood fits very well with the Apostasy.  Of the options she mentioned above, I like Option 3 best.

She let me know of a couple of other links you might find interesting.

• Elder Joanna by Kevin Barney @ By Common Consent, June 16, 2007
• Ordained Women in the Early Church: Book Review by Mogget @ Faith-Promoting Rumor, March 17, 2006

So, what do you make of Jack’s presentation?